Re: [xml] Potential wrong usage of xmlIsID() in tree.c
- From: Kasimier Buchcik <K Buchcik 4commerce de>
- To: Kasimier Buchcik <K Buchcik 4commerce de>
- Cc: Rob Richards <rrichards ctindustries net>, ML-libxml2 <xml gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [xml] Potential wrong usage of xmlIsID() in tree.c
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:00:15 +0100
Hi,
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 16:06 +0100, Kasimier Buchcik wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 08:56 -0500, Rob Richards wrote:
[...]
About 2b):
I would be happy if we could agree on using the "adopt" semantics
prior to handing nodes over to tree-modyfing functions. Although
the xmlDOMWrapAdoptNode() function looks a bit scary at first
sight, it could constitute a centralized way of get rid of
doc-moving issues in every tiny function.
Agreed. This is one thing I have been meaning at looking at. The issue I
hit was allowing a node without a doc to be passed to the setTreeDoc
functionality with a doc using dictionaries, which resulted in the doc
having mixed usage. Not sure what the result is if setTreeDoc is called
where both docs use dicts. I do believe I saw some bigger problems with
this when I first looked at it (has been a low priority for me since I
don't allow doc adoption in these functions other than a node without a
doc and doing so resulted in minimal impact).
If you could send a tiny example of what didn't work with it, I would
fix it :-)
Sorry, I had the xmlDOMWrapAdoptNode() function in mind when writing
that I'm eager to fix things, not the xmlSetTreeDoc() function.
Regards,
Kasimier
[...]
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]